Jump to content

Dirty Sexy Money: Discussion Thread


Recommended Posts

  • Members
Posted

It is VERY hard to follow. I don't think Berlanti ever was an actual show runner as he was busy with B&S and then Eli Stone, which is his focus, but he was involved--and still is I assume and it's handled at Berlanti's prodcution company. Craig Wright the creator is still one of the main writers--it's not a situation like the playwright/creator of B&S (which still worries me though I liek the new/current showrunners). Reims was the original showrunner--with Wright as creator.

The current show runner is the guy who worked on Big Shots isn't it? Which I thought was AWFUL and flopped so I have no idea what's going on but I enjoyed the direction the show was going so much I'm gonan remian cuationally optimistic (frtnakly I think Cerrone's planned darker directon sounded mroe interesting) He also was an EP at Tru Calling and Reunion two other shows I found awful... sigh this is worrying me more and more lol

Found this dated mid June:

There have been a lot of personnel changes made to the cast and creative staff of Dirty Sexy Money lately. Only four months after replacing original showrunner Josh Reims, Daniel Cerone has left his executive producer/showrunner position. Big Shots creator Jon Feldman is Cerone's replacement.

Apparently ABC didn't share Cerone's vision for a darker season two of Dirty Sexy Money. Fortunately, Cerone is leaving on good terms with the network. He still has a two-year deal with the ABC Studios. There will be an unexpected early break in production so that showrunner duties can be handed off to Jon Feldman.

I'm not sure what to expect from Dirty Sexy Money next season. There has only been one short season of the show, and DSM's already on its third showrunner. Series regular Samaire Armstrong's role has been scaled down, and Lucy Liu may be joining the cast. Will the show look and feel the same when it returns? If Cerone's take on Dirty Sexy Money was too dark, will the series become more of a soapy drama?

Is this news cause for concern, or just the usual retooling?

  • Replies 166
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members
Posted

The problems I have with the show begin with its title — it's beyond awful! And in my opinion, the role of Darling patriarch doesn't belong to Sutherland; he's just not suited to play it. And at this particular time, I can't think of anyone who could. But there are plenty of choices.

And Krause is a joke, I just dislike the actor. And also — it's a miscast.

I don't know what to say about Cerone, since he worked on Charmed! :lol: God knows what his vision for this show would look like! It seems that a good showrunner is difficult to find nowadays.

  • Members
Posted

^I wanted to lvoe this show but just.. couldnt.

Its a big mess, and not the awesome kinda soapy twisted messed up family mess it thinks it is. everything comes off as either stupid or bad.

I like PK, loved him on Sports Night or whatever that 90's sitcom was.

  • Members
Posted

I think it took a few episodes to find its footing but was awesome near the end--some fo the scnees between Sutherland and Krause were just hair raising and Jill Clayburgh has always been one of my fave older actresses--Seth Gabel prob surprising me and ending up being the other standout character--apparantly Berlanti cast him after his audition for Eli Stone blew him away (his bonding with krause's wife--the pot smoking int he gallery, etc was a brilliant scene).

Sylph I suspect you didn't watch too much of the show but tha tmay just be me beign snarky. I agree the title threw me off and took me a bit to get past--btu I do think Sutherland was great casting--and as a big SFU fan i love Krause but I can understand when you just don't like an actor (don't get me on a rant abotu Tom Hanks unless you have a lot of time...)

Cerone DID do a good job showrunning Dexter season 1--it seems silly for ABC to hire him off of Dexter, then complain he was too DARK lol. But I hated Charmed so :P yeah--

The show did seem to divide critics--Ent Weekly put it on their best of the year list, and I'm sure a few put it on their worse--so it makes sense it so sharply divided audiences I guess. I do hope we can all agree that it was miles better than Big Shots which again has me worried now that that show runner has moved to it... Sigh. Maybe primetime drama shorunner torubles are nearly as messed up as the Daytime head writer sitch

  • Members
Posted

Honestly, all it needs an overall storyline arc involving everyone. It doesnt have to be major, but build to something or idk. Every scene just seems to forced aside from the scenes between PK/DS.

  • Members
Posted

That's where they wer eheading with the last three eps (which may have been under a new showrunner cuz it had much more momentum). I wish we had got all the episodes filmed for last year --they didn't air three and will open this year with them.

  • Members
Posted

ABC posted a 5 minute "recap" of season one which is good since I'm sure even the peopel who watched every episode like me forget most of the details. There's also an interview with Greg Berlanti about all his shows (I have to admit he's pretty cute but I still find something about him off putting)

">
" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344">

  • Members
Posted

I really liked this show and I thought it had a lot of potential. It didn't quite live up to my hopes, but still it was quite good. I love PK, but his character needs to have something to play other than consternation at the self indulgent behavior of the Darlings. Imo, they need to show him longing for Karen, but fighting it tooth and nail. It would give his character more depth and make it easier to root for him. Also, they need to show that Nick is the one Karen really loves no matter what (or who) else she's doing.

These characters should not be allowed to get together until the show is almost through it's run, but there should be a lot more push and pull than we got last year when things were too campy.

There are so many good things about this show. The concept is good, several of the characters and actors are very good, but somehow the finished product doesn't quite gel. I also suspect that the writer's strike both hurt and saved this show. The ratings were pretty mediocre if I remember right and it seems like the plug might have been pulled if there were a lot of pilots to choose from. At the same time the strike screwed up the shows momentum. Will people come back after last season is the question. They didn't really give us enough reason to, but I will anyway because I think the characters are so much fun.

I'll be watching this show this fall, but I don't have a lot of hope that it will survive it's second year. All the backstage upheaval speaks to a lack of leadership and direction and that's something DSM has badly needed all along. It doesn't look like it will get it, but I hope I'm wrong. If we're lucky maybe the relaunch will be successful. Personally, I wish they had stuck with Cerone. I could have gotten behind a darker second season. What I can't get behind is fluff, which is basically what Big Shots was. I guess we'll see how things turn out soon enough. I have my fingers crossed.

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Members
Posted

SoapNet will be having a "Dirty Sexy Money" marathon on September 27th. The first season episodes will air from 9 am to 7 pm in anticipation of the October 1st return.

  • Members
Posted

Cerone left Dexter for DSM--apparantly to take it in a darker direction. Now they decided against that but in the current Ent Weekly they promise it'll be much "soapier". JuliaJms I think your view of the show is pretty spot on though I felt it was really gaining momentum at the end. I'll agree (and it seems the cast and crew do too) that it never *quite* clicked despite all the talent behind and in front of the camera and I hope it finds its footing cuz I have a lot of affection for it and for the kinda show it could be.

Here's the Ent Weekly piece:

Returning Drama

Starts October 1, 10-11PM, ABC

The 125 black-tie partygoers on this three-story yacht have been at it since the previous night, but the wineglasses are still clinking, the twinkle lights still twinkling, the Jacuzzi still bubbling. Then, suddenly, a hush sweeps over the crowd as they hover wearily over trays of plastic sushi and warm glasses of bubbly: The climactic scene on this Dirty Sexy Money episode is finally going down after 16 hours of shooting. A tuxedoed Tripp Darling (Donald Sutherland) presents a small, shiny gift to his family's principled lawyer, Nick George (Peter Krause). ''It's the key to this boat,'' Tripp booms. ''It's yours.'' But seconds later, a half dozen cops storm the vessel, and the family politico, Attorney General Patrick Darling (William Baldwin), turns an accusatory gaze on Nick: ''What the hell have you done?''

We won't spoil what brought on the NYPD raid, but we will tell you what Nick and the Darlings are trying to do: Their mission is to reinvent the prime-time network soap. Again. Last fall, ABC attempted to launch its ''Dynasty for the new millennium,'' as creator/exec producer Craig Wright describes it, with much fanfare. It seemed reasonable to think Sexy would sell: The tongue-in-cheek chronicle of an — berwealthy family living in the age of gossipmongering boasted a platinum cast, including Sutherland, Baldwin, Oscar nominee Jill Clayburgh as family matriarch Letitia, and Emmy nominee Krause as their moral center. But the series premiered to an okay 10.4 million viewers — and dropped to a paltry 6.7 million by episode 10. Worse still, the writers' strike ended DSM's season with the Dec. 5 episode.

Still, ABC saw potential payoff in the Darlings. So just as it did with Pushing Daisies and Grey's Anatomy spin-off Private Practice, the network gave producers time off in the spring to regroup, rather than rushing back on air post-strike. Now Wright & Co. have a second chance to make a show that lives up to its seductive name.

A television series is like a mirage in the beginning,'' says Krause. ''Until you all agree on what it is you're heading toward, it's hard. I think we're getting there now.'' The road to creative clarity, though, was rough. Just after the strike, Dexter exec producer Daniel Cerone replaced original showrunner Josh Reims. Then ABC Studios swapped Cerone out for Jon Harmon Feldman (Big Shots) and started this season from scratch. Execs say the leadership changes were simply about getting the behind-the-scenes chemistry right. ''Jon's a perfect fit,'' says Steve Tann, ABC Studios' vice president of current programming. ''He shares Craig's vision for the show.'' Adds Wright: ''No one was to blame. We took the show in a direction very briefly where we thought, 'If we did that, would it make everyone happy?' We did it, and then went, 'No.'''

The plan that made everyone finally say ''yes'' involves amping things up to prime-time-soap levels, with all the wealthy trappings a cash-strapped nation wants to fantasize about. ''It's getting dirtier, sexier, and moneyer,'' Wright says. ''We're selling the wish fulfillment.'' The story picks up six months after the finale, in which Nick found out about Karen's (Natalie Zea) affair with Simon Elder (Blair Underwood); Brian (Glenn Fitzgerald) left the ministry and joined the family business; and Patrick's transgendered mistress, Carmelita (Candis Cayne), vanished. The premiere will feature character introductions for neophytes and plenty of action for fans, including murder, the revelation of a possible culprit in Nick's father's death, and new cast member Lucy Liu as Nola Lyons. ''She's like a wrecking ball,'' says Liu. ''Even if she makes a mistake, you can't tell, because she walks right over it.''

Nola will begin flirting with layabout playboy Jeremy (Seth Gabel), who'll continue to struggle with the sexual tension between him and Nick's wife, Lisa (Zoe McLellan). Samaire Armstrong, who played spoiled Juliet, and who struggled with ''personal issues'' at an outpatient facility last fall, won't return as a series regular. (Producers insist Armstrong was a casualty of plot changes, nothing more. ''She will still be a member of the family and on the show,'' Wright says.) Nick, meanwhile, is fighting his attraction to Karen, even as she gets closer to Simon, a man with possibly nefarious interest in the Darlings. ''You think you've got him figured out, but the next scene it turns around,'' Underwood says of Simon, whom he describes as ''the chocolate Richard Branson.'' How explosive could things get? ''The best way for Simon to use his power is to end Karen's life,'' Wright hints. ''Whether Nick would allow that to happen and what it might cost him to stop it is an interesting question.''

The cast knows all too well the price of being on a could-be-great prime-time soap that can't quite seem to get off the ground. ''It feels like the start of season 3,'' Krause sighs, ''and we haven't even done a full season's worth of episodes yet.'' Adds Baldwin: ''We're so close, I can taste what it would be like if I were on a hit television series.'' Better than prop sushi and two-day-old fake champagne, we hope.

  • Members
Posted

Is it just me or does it seem shor runners are having a hard time the past year or two--I guess the strike played a big part. It seems more than usual shows are running through a number of them.

Josh Reims was showrunner number 1 for I think the first 8 episodes, followed by Daniel Cerrone who it sounds like basically was in charge of the two remainign eps that aired (which went ina direction I liked--oh well) and a couple coming up--if even that, and currently it's Jon Harmon Feldman. Craig Wright has stayed on the show as a main writer and EP the whole time.

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Administrator
Posted

1. Josh Reims (first season)

2. Daniel Cerone

3. Jon H. Feldman (current showrunner)

I believe ABC is dumping the Cerone episodes (so ABC basically wasted money shooting those episodes) and starting the season from scratch. So, the season premiere will be a JHF showrun episode.

This show is such a mess behind the scenes! Hopefully they'll be able to straighten everything.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


  • Recent Posts

    • Please register in order to view this content

       
    • Week ending March 5 1978 Second season shows are tested CBS finishes first week in March with stronger than usual 1 9.5, but not enough to beat ABC The prime -time ratings pattern continued to hold steady for the week ended March 5, and attention increasingly turns to second season entries as the networks probe one another's weaknesses or cover their own. As usual, ABC -TV won the week, scoring a 20.5 average rating. But CBS -TV was closer than usual with a 19.5 average garnered with the help of several strong specials and movies in addition to some of its dependable series regulars. NBC followed its habit of plummeting when its "évent "entries failed. In this case it was the miniseries, Loose Change, which scored only 24 and 22 shares on Monday and Tuesday, leaving the network with a 16.9 average rating for the week. Looking at new series and new time slots, ABC's Six Million Dollar Man on Monday (8 -9 p.m. NYT) continued to falter with a 22 share, while What's Happening, in its new slot on Saturday (8 -9 p.m.), also remained shaky with a 23 share. Starsky and Hutch is still healthy with a 38 share in its new slot following Charlie's Angels on Wednesday, and How the West Was Won also had a 38 on Sunday (8 -9 p.m.). Against West CBS's Rhoda and On Our Own came in poorly for the second week in a row of face to face competition, with each pulling 25 shares after a 41 share lead in from 60 Minutes. ABC's special two -hour presentation of the upcoming series tryout, Having Babies, scored a 27 share on Friday (9 -11 p.m.) against strong competition from both the other networks (the movie "Ski Lift to Death" on CBS and Rockford Files and Quincy on NBC). For CBS, its new Monday night leadoffs, Good Times and Baby I'm Back, scored so -so 27 and 28 shares respectively. But the second half of the night had its best performance since the new line -up came in- M *A*S *Hwith a 45, One Day at a Time with a 41 and Lou Grant with a 36. Celebrity Challenge of the Sexes and Shields and Yarnell showed no signs of reviving on Tuesday, with 16 shares each, but the new Tuesday movie slot held up with a 41 share from Clint Eastwood's "Magnum Force." The network's entire Saturday line up continued to limp in, as Bob Newhart Tony Randall, The Jeffersons, Maude and Kojak all scored sub 30 shares (with the exception of Newhart's 29, in fact, all scored sub -25 shares). NBC premiered its new Chuck Barris Rah Rah Show on Tuesday (8 -9 p.m.),when it pulled a 24 share. The second episode of Quark had a 27, three points down from its premiere. There might be the temptation to conclude that the 29 share turned in by the National Love, Sex and Marriage Test on Sunday (9:30 -10 p.m.) proves the appetite for "sophisticated" subject matter is not insatiable after all, except that its competition was not only CBS's strong comedy block but also ABC's rerun of "The Way We Were," which pulled a 35 share. Of NBC's other midseason entries -CPO Sharkey, Black Sheep Squadron, James at 16 and Class of '65 -CPO Sharkey turned in the highest score of the week, a 27.   *NBC were in dire straits at this point relying on movies and specials which could hit or bomb in equal measure.  Fred Silverman had his work cut out for him when he arrived that Summer. He favored sitcoms and series as the schedule's foundation and NBC had no sitcoms to build on and few solid series. He also had a big backlog of specials/mini series that had been committed to air. Also NBC had a long standing relationship with Universal so he was forced to work with that studio. He struggled to get quality producers on board as they were either tied into deals with ABC/CBS or were wary of having their shows on the 3rd rated network. He still felt variety had a place on the schedule however and that lead to duds like Susan Anton, The Big Show and Pink Lady and Jeff.
    • Please register in order to view this content

       
    • I spent years hoping we would get an oral history like the OLTL book, but it’s too late now with so many having passed away.
    • It’s also strange that it was Monica! I just don’t think of her as the staring off into space type of woman! I watched a bunch of other clips and stuff from random 1978 and 1979 episodes. I’m so used to seeing movement from Monty’s era, especially the early part, that this really is a cool relic. Pretty soon you have scenes start at the new nurses station, the elevators opening and doctors walking to the desk to get their messages from Jessie or Bobbie. People often walk towards doors while taking coats on or off, many Webber house scenes start or end with someone walking up the stairs. This episode is even more static than some of the way earlier ones I have seen, where you would have Steve or Jessie at least going from the old school nurses desk to the medicine room, Steve’s office, etc. That bland dialogue is very much like what they have now. The show picks up a lot of personality. Knowing what we know about David Hamilton and how that really started to get the ball rolling as far as viewers you really see just how vital Lesley and especially Laura were to get things moving for them. They focused on the right characters to get fast results. The show now could learn a thing or two from this.
    • It won't allow me to watch it via the link; I am only able to watch it with the app.
    • Just finished the Goldfinch. Read it in 4-5 days... and it's a huuuuge book. Well... I would rate the first 500 pages a solid 10 out of 10... but then the next 300 were kind of a letdown... so the overall impression is something like - 7/10. It's just very hard to give something a full 10 after reading A little life.  Still... loved it immensely and would probably re-read it in the future. There is a movie adaptation... starring Nicole Kidman... that I haven't seen. 
    • I realize I harp on this, but I think he spending is relevant.  She's not just buying new wigs. She's building a mansion, she's funding a sports complex, she's paying for operations for people she doesn't know, she's caring for Peaches, she's buying apartments. We saw ?her get ONE check for ONE million dollars. That's it. I may be wrong, but I thought they said she'd get a payment every 6 months. Regardless, she could not rule the roost on $1M, and the show is not doing a good job there. Pretending that doesn't matter? I can't do that.  All they had to do was add a couple lines about payouts and payments.  In other news, I would love to know just how much Anita was putting into that trust as well as what investment got her what has to be an incredible return.

      Please register in order to view this content

       
    • I'm honestly surprised Nikki and Victor have not divorced yet... maybe their brief opening of the marriage did something for them. 

      Please register in order to view this content

    • It reminded me of what the Pollocks got away with all the time on THE DOCTORS: long ass flashbacks that don't really add anything to the scene except time.  Because, if you remove the flashback, what's left?  Monica finishes packing Alan's suitcase.  The end. Oh, well.  At least I got to see a young Patricia Elliott (ex-Renee, OLTL) in that Aim toothpaste commercial (not to mention, a shirtless James O'Sullivan (ex-Jeff, AMC; ex-Pete, OLTL; ex-Jerry, SOMERSET) in the commercial for One-a-Day vitamins, lol).
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy